DOCSLIB.ORG

Serbia by Sanja Pesek and Dragana Nikolajevic

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Serbia by Sanja Pesek and Dragana Nikolajevic Serbia by Sanja Pesek and Dragana Nikolajevic Capital: Belgrade Population: 7.4 million GNI/capita: US$10,380 Source: The data above was provided by The World Bank, World Bank Indicators 2010. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores Yugoslavia Serbia 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Electoral Process 4.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Civil Society 4.00 3.00 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.50 Independent Media 4.50 3.50 3.25 3.50 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.75 3.75 4.00 Governance* 5.25 4.25 4.25 4.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a National Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a 4.00 4.00 3.75 4.00 4.00 3.75 Local Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 Judicial Framework and Independence 5.50 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.50 4.50 4.50 Corruption 6.25 5.25 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.75 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Democracy Score 5.04 4.00 3.88 3.83 3.75 3.71 3.68 3.79 3.79 3.71 * Starting with the 2005 edition, Freedom House introduced separate analysis and ratings for national democratic governance and local democratic governance to provide readers with more detailed and nuanced analysis of these two important subjects. NOTES: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year. 456 Nations in Transit 2010 Executive Summary erbia’s transition to democracy began in 2000, a decade later than most countries in the region. When the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Sa federation of six republics, broke apart in 1991, Serbia and Montenegro formed the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) in 1992. The extradition of former president Slobodan Milošević in 2001 to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) signaled Serbia’s determination to reintegrate itself within the international community, although it did little to end political instability within its own borders. The assassination of then Serbian prime minister Zoran Djindjić only two years later highlighted the dangerous divides within and between Serbia’s ruling political and security elites. Replacing the FRY in February 2003, Serbia and Montenegro signed the Belgrade Agreement to form a unified state. The 2004 election of President Boris Tadić, a pro-reform and pro-European Union (EU) integration advocate, improved Serbia’s political and international prospects. In May 2006, citizens of Montenegro voted by 55.5 percent to terminate their three-year state union with Serbia. Also in 2006, albeit amid controversy, the new Constitution of the Republic of Serbia was accepted. In 2008, a number of significant events took place: Serbia held provincial, parliamentary, and presidential elections; Kosovo unilaterally declared independence; the ICTY indictee, Radovan Karadžić, was arrested and extradited to the UN War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague; and the government faced difficult discussions over EU membership. There were significant improvements in Serbia in 2009 in the areas of civil society, local governance, and national democratic governance. Parliament passed a number of long-awaited laws, including the Antidiscrimination Law, the Law on Associations, the Vojvodina Statute and the accompanying Law on Transfer of Jurisdiction from National to Municipal Government, as well as the Law on Financing of Political Organizations. In late November, the EU abolished visa requirements for the citizens of Serbia, which will take effect on January 1, 2010. In early December, EU Foreign Affairs Ministers meeting in Brussels removed restrictions against the Interim Trade Agreement (the trade part of the Stabilization and Association Agreement, or SAA) with Serbia after the Netherlands put aside objections following a positive report by the Chief Prosecutor of the ICTY, Serge Brammertz, on Serbia’s cooperation with the Hague War Crimes Tribunal. In addition, on December 22, the Swedish presidency of the EU accepted the EU candidacy bid for Serbia’s full EU membership. Despite these welcome trends, concerns persist over whether Serbia can maintain full cooperation with the ICTY in apprehending the two remaining fugitives—Ratko Mladić, former military chief of Serbs in Bosnia, and Goran Hadžić, a former Serb leader in Croatia. Serbia 457 National Democratic Governance. In 2009, the Serbian government demon- strated stability and focused on accession to the EU, despite the global economic crisis and other challenges. In November, Parliament adopted the long-awaited Statute of Vojvodina, providing new powers to the autonomous province, including the authority to enter into international and inter-regional agreements, to open representative offices abroad, and to create the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Vojvodina. In December, the EU agreed to resume the interim trade agreement with Serbia and removed visa requirements for citizens of Serbia traveling to EU member states. Following positive reviews from the European Commission and ICTY, Serbia submitted its application for full EU membership in late December. As a result of achieving long-awaited positive developments in 2009, and despite concerns that the government will continue with uneven efforts toward meeting its domestic and international obligations, Serbia’s national democratic governance rating improves from 4.00 to 3.75. Electoral Process. While mostly focused on international diplomacy and the consequences of the economic crisis, the Serbian government largely failed to engage the citizenry in its pro-reform agenda, rendering voters vulnerable to the effective populist rhetoric of the Serbian Radical Party (SRS) and Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), as reflected in the results of the 2009 Belgrade municipal elections. During the year, the Law on Election of Councillors, Law on the State Electoral Commission, and Law on the Single Register of Voters were drafted. The new Law on Political Parties, which will establish stricter rules for registration and likely reduce the number of parties, was passed by Parliament in May 2009. Despite these positive developments, the country’s electoral framework remains weak and lags behind European standards, thus Serbia’s electoral process rating stays at 3.25. Civil Society. After nine years of repeated attempts and persistent lobbying by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), the Serbian Parliament finally passed the new Law on Associations and the Antidiscrimination Law in 2009. Additionally, NGO advocacy efforts have led to greater cooperation with the government, including a recently announced Government Office for Cooperation with Civil Society. These are significant advances in establishing more stable and favorable conditions for NGOs, human rights defenders, and citizens alike. These achievements are even more remarkable in the context of a year marked by violence and threats by extremist groups against various sectors of civil society. Although trade unions continue to be marginalized, the workers’ movement is gaining momentum in its demands for decentralization and the fight against corruption. Owing to the strengthening role and stability of civil society and increasing cooperation from government structures, Serbia’s civil society rating improves from 2.75 to 2.50. Independent Media. Serbia’s already fragile media regulatory framework was further weakened in 2009 by controversial new laws and amendments that were hastily adopted without public debate. There are growing concerns that this new 458 Nations in Transit 2010 legislation could further increase self-censorship, economically weaken the media sector, and jeopardize its independence in relation to the country’s political powers. Recent attacks against journalists and media outlets, in addition to previously unresolved murders and attacks, have created a climate where violence against journalists increasingly appears to go unpunished. Given these negative trends, Serbia’s independent media rating worsens from 3.75 to 4.00. Local Democratic Governance. In 2009, the Serbian Parliament adopted the long-awaited bill on the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, which harmonizes the province’s jurisdiction with the constitution, conducts a decentralization process, and expands autonomy of the province. However, the accompanying law on the transfer of state property to local authorities has not yet been adopted. Although the national Parliament has yet to pass a number of relevant laws in this domain, this adopted legislation is a crucial first step toward a substantial decentralization of government powers and responsibilities. Owing to the passage of the long-awaited bill on the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Serbia’s local democratic governance rating improves from 3.75 to 3.50. Judicial Framework and Independence. The significant backlog of civil, criminal, commercial, and administrative cases coupled with the inefficient enforcement of judgments, continue to plague Serbia’s justice system. Although some key laws were passed in 2008–09, a number of obstacles must still be overcome in order to establish an independent judiciary. Likewise, progress on domestic war crimes cases has been slow. The entry into force of the 2006 Criminal Procedure Code was postponed for the second time until the end of 2010. Serbia is making progress in the adoption and implementation of a new legislative framework, but much reform is still needed to bring about the independence, accountability, and efficiency of the judiciary. Thus, Serbia’s judicial framework and independence rating remains at 4.50.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hungary's Policy Towards Its Kin Minorities
    Hungary’s policy towards its kin minorities: The effects of Hungary’s recent legislative measures on the human rights situation of persons belonging to its kin minorities Óscar Alberto Lema Bouza Supervisor: Prof. Zsolt Körtvélyesi Second Semester University: Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem, Budapest, Hungary Academic Year 2012/2013 Óscar A. Lema Bouza Abstract Abstract: This thesis focuses on the recent legislative measures introduced by Hungary aimed at kin minorities in the neighbouring countries. Considering as relevant the ones with the largest Hungarian minorities (i.e. Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine), the thesis starts by presenting the background to the controversy, looking at the history, demographics and politics of the relevant states. After introducing the human rights standards contained in international and national legal instruments for the protection of minorities, the thesis looks at the reasons behind the enactment of the laws. To do so the politically dominant concept of Hungarian nation is examined. Finally, the author looks at the legal and political restrictions these measures face from the perspective of international law and the reactions of the affected countries, respectively. The research shows the strong dependency between the measures and the political conception of the nation, and points out the lack of amelioration of the human rights situation of ethnic Hungarians in the said countries. The reason given for this is the little effects produced on them by the measures adopted by Hungary and the potentially prejudicial nature of the reaction by the home states. The author advocates for a deeper cooperation between Hungary and the home states. Keywords: citizenship, ethnic preference, Fundamental Law, home state, human rights, Hungary, kin state, minorities, nation, Nationality Law, preferential treatment,Status Law.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia by Misha Savic
    Serbia by Misha Savic Capital: Belgrade Population: 7.2 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$11,430 Source: The data above are drawn from the World Bank’sWorld Development Indicators 2014. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Electoral Process 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Civil Society 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Independent Media 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.75 3.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 National Democratic Governance 4.00 4.00 3.75 4.00 4.00 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Local Democratic Governance 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 Judicial Framework and Independence 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Corruption 5.00 4.75 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 Democracy Score 3.75 3.71 3.68 3.79 3.79 3.71 3.64 3.64 3.64 3.64 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest.
    [Show full text]
  • UNDP RS NARS and Indepen
    The National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia Serbia AND INDEPENDENT BODIES SERBIA THE REPUBLIC OF OF ASSEMBLY NATIONAL NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES 253 NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA AND INDEPENDENT BODIES Materials from the Conference ”National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia and Independent Bodies” Belgrade, 26-27 November 2009 and an Overview of the Examples of International Practice Olivera PURIĆ UNDP Deputy Resident Representative a.i. Edited by Boris ČAMERNIK, Jelena MANIĆ and Biljana LEDENIČAN The following have participated: Velibor POPOVIĆ, Maja ŠTERNIĆ, Jelena MACURA MARINKOVIĆ Translated by: Novica PETROVIĆ Isidora VLASAK English text revised by: Charles ROBERTSON Design and layout Branislav STANKOVIĆ Copy editing Jasmina SELMANOVIĆ Printing Stylos, Novi Sad Number of copies 150 in English language and 350 in Serbian language For the publisher United Nations Development Programme, Country Office Serbia Internacionalnih brigada 69, 11000 Beograd, +381 11 2040400, www.undp.org.rs ISBN – 978-86-7728-125-0 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations and the United Nations Development Programme. Acknowledgement We would like to thank all those whose hard work has made this publication possible. We are particularly grateful for the guidance and support of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, above all from the Cabinet of the Speaker and the Secretariat. A special debt of gratitude is owed to the representatives of the independent regulatory bodies; the Commissioner for Information of Public Importance and Personal Data Protection, the State Audit Institution, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Serbia and the Anti-corruption Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Councils of National Minorities in Serbia
    The national councils of national minorities in Serbia Katinka Beretka* and István Gergő Székely** January 2016 Recommended citation: Beretka Katinka and Székely István Gergő, “The national councils of national minorities in the Republic of Serbia”, Online Compendium Autonomy Arrangements in the World, January 2016, at www.world-autonomies.info. © 2016 Autonomy Arrangements in the World Content 1. Essential Facts and Figures 2. Autonomy in the Context of the State Structure 3. Establishment and Implementation of Autonomy 4. Legal Basis of Autonomy 5. Autonomous Institutions 6. Autonomous Powers 7. Financial Arrangements 8. Intergovernmental Relations 9. Inter-group Relations within the Autonomous Entity (not applicable) 10. Membership, “Quasi-citizenship” and Special Rights 11. General Assessment and Outlook Bibliography 2016 © Autonomy Arrangements in the World Project 1. Essential Facts and Figures 1 Serbia is located in the center of the Balkans, being an everyday subject of world news from the beginning of the 1990s, often due to ethnicity-related issues, ranging from civil war and secession to autonomy arrangements meant to accommodate ethnocultural diversity. Although according to the 2011 census almost 20% of the total population of the state (without Kosovo) belong to a minority group (see Table 1), in Serbia there are no officially recognized or unrecognized minorities. There is neither an exact enumeration of minority groups, nor clear principles to be followed about how a minority should be recognized. While the absence of precise regulations may be regarded as problematic, the approach of Serbia to the minority question can also be interpreted as being rather liberal, which may have resulted from the intention to protect ethnic Serb refugees who have become minorities abroad, including in the former Yugoslav member states.
    [Show full text]
  • Party Politics in the Western Balkans
    Party Politics in the Western Balkans Edited by Věra Stojarová and Peter Emerson 2 Legacy of communist and socialist parties in the Western Balkans Věra Stojarová As Ishiyama and Bozóki note, the development of communist successor parties1 in post- communist politics has had an important effect upon the development of democracy (Bozóki and Ishiyama 2002: 393). In some countries the communist party was outlawed; in many cases it was transformed into a party of a socialist or social democratic character; elsewhere, the communist party began to take part in the democratic process, which led to varying results; in some cases, the party transformed itself into a classic socialist or social democratic party; while in other cases it retained a communist ideology. As the literature reveals, the type of the regime, the modus of transition, the manner of financing political parties, the organisation of the parties, as well as the whole political context, all matter. Ishiyama suggests that the patrimonial communist regime (as in Serbia) produced communist successor parties which had to distinguish themselves from the previous communist system and hence turned towards nationalism, while in a national- consensus regime (Slovenia, Croatia), the successor parties developed policies that divorced the party from the past, and led to the emergence of a social democratic identity (Ishiyama 1998: 81–2). Nevertheless, the application of the above- mentioned theory reveals the exceptionality of the Western Balkan countries. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the ethnic structure and the different goals of the three ethnicities had a great impact on the formation of political parties, which were mainly based on ethnic grounds, and left little space to the parties with a social democratic orientation.
    [Show full text]
  • Contemporary Russian-Serbian Relations
    1 Contemporary Russian-Serbian Relations: Interviews with Youth from Political Parties in Belgrade and Vojvodina By Chloe Kay Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of Colorado Boulder Defended March 31, 2014 Primary Advisor Rimgaila Salys, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Committee Members Tatiana Mikhailova, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Laura Osterman, Dept. of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures Laurel Rodd, Dept. of Asian Languages and Civilizations 2 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………..3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………….4 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Historical Relations between Serbia and Russia………………………………………….7 Relations in the Middle Ages to 2008……………………………………………..7 Political Relations 2008-today………………………………………………………..11 Cultural Ties……………………………………………………………………………………13 Energy and Economics……………………………………………………………………14 Serbia in between East and West……………………………………………………15 The Opinions of Two Experts………………………………………………………………………17 Data Collection and Results………………………….….………………………………………….23 The history of Russian and Serbian Relations………………………….……….23 Russia as an International Actor in the World and the in Balkans…..25 Russia and Serbia: 200 million………………………………………………………...28 South Stream Pipeline: A gift or a scam?.………………………………………..30 Serbia: Caught in the Middle?………………………………………………………….31 Vladimir Putin and the Kosovo Question………………………………………….34 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………………………35
    [Show full text]
  • ETHNIC SELF-GOVERNANCE in SERBIA the First Two Years of The
    DÉLKELET EURÓPA – SOUTH -EAST EUROPE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS QUARTERLY , Vol. 3. No.2. (Summer 2012/2) ETHNIC SELF-GOVERNANCE IN SERBIA The First Two Years of the National Minority Councils TIBOR PURGER (Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey ) Abstract The 2009 Law on National Councils of National Minorities (LNCNM) created a new system of self- governance for ethnic minorities, over one-sixth of the population, in the Republic of Serbia. The law establishes the legal framework for and empowers national minority councils (NMCs) to legitimately represent members of their respective minorities in matters of culture, education, the media, and official use of language, as pertaining to each minority. The NMCs can create institutions, organizations, and for-profit companies to promote their interests. Rights so granted vis-à-vis state organs are only consultative in nature, but still significant enough to be considered a prototype of ethnic cultural autonomy. The councils receive budgetary funds for their work but can generate their own income and receive aid from foreign and international sources as well. The implementation, immediate consequences, and conflicts related to the LNCNM have a broad impact on ethnic politics in Serbia: they help determine how national minorities organize themselves to preserve their identity, what kind of relationships they develop, and how they relate to the Serbian state. This paper studies the precursors of the law and its implementation, the results and difficulties of the national minority councils, and suggests further research. Keywords: cultural autonomy, ethnic self-governance, national minorities, Serbia * Introduction It might seem to be too early to study a new set of institutions not even two years old, created by legislative action of the Serbian Parliament on August 31, 2009, based on short previous experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Session Report
    31st SESSION Strasbourg, 19-21 October 2016 CG31(2016)21 19 October 2016 Information report on the observation of local and provincial elections in Serbia (24 April 2016) Monitoring Committee Rapporteur1: Karim VAN OVERMEIRE, Belgium (R, NR) Summary Further to an invitation by the Republic Electoral Commission of Serbia, the Congress’ Bureau decided to deploy a limited Electoral Assessment Mission in order to monitor the local and provincial elections organised on 24 April 2016. The early Parliamentary elections held on the same day in Serbia were observed by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. The present information report reflects the key findings of the 12-member delegation based on in- depth briefings in Belgrade and Novi Sad prior to the E-Day and on observations made by six Congress teams in more than 120 polling stations throughout the country, with a special attention to the organisation of the regional elections in the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina and the vote organised for the Municipal Councils. Apart from isolated irregularities, the elections were carried out in a calm and orderly manner, largely in line with European electoral standards. However, the Congress’ delegation found that there was room for improvement of the practical side of the elections, notably regarding the protection of the secrecy of the vote and the level of professionalism of the electoral administration. In particular, the extended composition of polling boards led to difficulties in managing different aspects of the electoral process including the vote count. At the same time, the Congress supports a genuine reform in order to complement the legal framework of elections focusing on issues such as party and campaign financing, misuse of administrative resources, the quality of the voters’ lists, candidates’ registration and the minority status of political parties.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Elections in Serbia –
    Parliamentary Elections in Serbia – Clear Victory for the Serbian President Silvia Nadjivan, IDM Lucas Maximilian Schubert, IDM The Serbian Parliamentary elections on June 21th, 2020 have brought a clear victory to the Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić, who had however overrided the Serbian constitution by dominating the previous election campaigns with his omnipresence. In fact, the winning party, the Serbian Progressive Party (Srpska Napredna Stranka, SNS) has formed an additional list named “Aleksandar Vučić – for our children”, although Vučić by law is not allowed to candidate at all. With 62.6% the Cementing SNS will expectedly form the next government together with its previous junior partner, the governmental Socialist Party of Serbia (Socijalistička Partija Srbije, SPS) under Ivica Dačić that gained 10.9% power together with its pre-electoral coalition partner United Serbia (Jedinstvena Srbija, JS) under Dragan Marković Palma. Apart from the minority parties that do not have to pass the census, another party will be with 4.2% represented in the parliament. It is the one of the former water polo player Aleksandar Šapić, Victory for Serbia (Pobeda za Srbiju, SPAS), who is explicitly interested in joining the government. In such a case, the parliament would not include any opposition anymore, while the Serbian government at any rate will be able to cement its power. What is not certain for now is which SNS politician will be nominated under the auspices of the Serbian President to take over the function of the Prime Minister. Not only presidential or autocratic habits within a parliamentary democracy system appear to be unusual, but also the Serbian Parliamentary elections as such, since they have been the first national in Europe after the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Chronicle of Parliamentary Elections 2007 Chronicle of Parliamentary Elections Volume 41
    Couverture_Ang:Mise en page 1 27.3.2008 14:33 Page 1 Print ISSN: 1994-0963 Electronic ISSN: 1994-098X INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION CHRONICLE OF PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2007 CHRONICLE OF PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS VOLUME 41 Published annually in English and French since 1967, the Chronicle of Parliamen tary Elections reports on all national legislative elections held throughout the world during a given year. It includes information on the electoral system, the background and outcome of each election as well as statistics on the results, distribution of votes and distribution of seats according to political group, sex and age. The information contained in the Chronicle can also be found in the IPU’s database on national parliaments, PARLINE. PARLINE is accessible on the IPU web site (http://www.ipu.org) and is continually updated. Inter-Parliamentary Union VOLUME 41 5, chemin du Pommier Case postale 330 CH-1218 Le Grand-Saconnex Geneva – Switzerland Tel.: +41 22 919 41 50 Fax: +41 22 919 41 60 2007 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: http://www.ipu.org 2007 Chronicle of Parliamentary Elections VOLUME 41 1 January - 31 December 2007 © Inter-Parliamentary Union 2008 Print ISSN: 1994-0963 Electronic ISSN: 1994-098X Photo credits Front cover: Photo AFP/Pascal Pavani Back cover: Photo AFP/Tugela Ridley Inter-Parliamentary Union Office of the Permanent Observer of 5, chemin du Pommier the IPU to the United Nations Case postale 330 220 East 42nd Street CH-1218 Le Grand-Saconnex Suite 3002 Geneva — Switzerland New York, N.Y. 10017 USA Tel.: + 41 22
    [Show full text]
  • Compilation of Lectures: Participation of Minorities in Public Life
    Compilation of Lectures: Participation of Minorities in Public Life Alexander Osipov Hanna Vasilevich Stanislav Černega Editors ECMI Handbook December 2017 ECMI Handbook The European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI) is a non-partisan institution founded in 1996 by the Governments of the Kingdom of Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, and the German State of Schleswig-Holstein. ECMI was established in Flensburg, at the heart of the Danish-German border region, in order to draw from the encouraging example of peaceful coexistence between minorities and majorities achieved here. ECMI’s aim is to promote interdisciplinary research on issues related to minorities and majorities in a European perspective and to contribute to the improvement of interethnic relations in those parts of Western and Eastern Europe where ethnopolitical tension and conflict prevail. ECMI Handbooks are written either by the staff of ECMI or by outside authors commissioned by the Centre. As ECMI does not propagate opinions of its own, the views expressed in any of its publications are the sole responsibility of the author concerned. ECMI Handbook European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI) Director: Prof. Dr. Tove H. Malloy © ECMI 2017 ISBN 978-3-9819442-1-1 This handbook has been prepared with the support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark 2 | P a g e ECMI Handbook Contents Introduction Alexander Osipov & Hanna Vasilevich ................................................................................. 4 Rethinking the Notion of ‘Integration’: Building
    [Show full text]